Lucroy wants to be traded to a contender

[davell]

Going after a C now, would be a stupid use of resources. Between Montero, Schwarber, and Contreras, I feel pretty confident about 2017 as well. The FO certainly likes Contreras, if we hand it to him next year, I won't be surprised at all. I'd go as far as to say he'd need to fall on his face in AAA this year for that NOT to happen. If it does, all bets are off. But preserving assets means much more currently than trying to upgrade a spot that likely doesn't lend itself to that huge of an upgrade to begin with.

 

1) Frontline SP

2) Late inning BP guy(and those could be flip flopped for all I know)

 

Anything else can and should be put on the backburner until it actually becomes a need.

[Clem Fandango]

Going after a C now, would be a stupid use of resources. Between Montero, Schwarber, and Contreras, I feel pretty confident about 2017 as well. The FO certainly likes Contreras, if we hand it to him next year, I won't be surprised at all. I'd go as far as to say he'd need to fall on his face in AAA this year for that NOT to happen. If it does, all bets are off. But preserving assets means much more currently than trying to upgrade a spot that likely doesn't lend itself to that huge of an upgrade to begin with.

 

1) Frontline SP

2) Late inning BP guy(and those could be flip flopped for all I know)

 

Anything else can and should be put on the backburner until it actually becomes a need.

 

I concur

[davell]

The Heyward move didn't teach us anything. CF was a horsefeathering need. We literally had Matt Szczur on our roster and that was it, prior to Heyward. You assess Contreras this season(as I already said) and go from there. A lot more will be known as to whether or not it looks like he's capable of becoming our starting C in 2017 after seeing how 2016 goes.

[davell]

You realize that half the guys you're trying to get us to trade for at C have either sucked fiercely in the majors or have zero major league experience, right?

 

Sanchez. Hedges. Plawecki. Zunino. Suck or have little to zero experience. Here comes the pedigree horsefeathers you'll attempt to use.....

 

As for the Heyward in CF comment.....I will gladly admit I didn't think we'd go after him for CF, I was of the opinion his size would keep the FO from looking at him there, figuring he'd still be a possibility for RF obviously. David and TT(I think) were the two that posted enough about the smaller OF to where it makes sense to me now. That doesn't change the fact we needed an OF at the time and we signed one. It was much more of a need than C is or even will be at this time next year.

[davell]

And just like that, Contreras is named the top catching prospect in baseball, by MLB. So I guess there very well may be some people in baseball who see Contreras being better than some of that group....

[Transmogrified Tiger]

This all seems a little silly to me. The Cubs have 3 guys with the potential to start at catcher(2 on the MLB roster), but uncertainty about all of them being that person(will Montero still be good, will Contreras continue his pace at AAA, is Schwarber a catcher). Adding another MLB rostered catcher to the mix right now is not a good way to hedge against those outcomes, especially since the odds of having a decent option in house for 2017 is pretty decent. The Cubs may very well need a catcher for 2017, given the assets they have at the position now, making a move as decisive as trading for an MLB catcher at this point is not a good idea.

[davell]

This all seems a little silly to me. The Cubs have 3 guys with the potential to start at catcher(2 on the MLB roster), but uncertainty about all of them being that person(will Montero still be good, will Contreras continue his pace at AAA, is Schwarber a catcher). Adding another MLB rostered catcher to the mix right now is not a good way to hedge against those outcomes, especially since the odds of having a decent option in house for 2017 is pretty decent. The Cubs may very well need a catcher for 2017, given the assets they have at the position now, making a move as decisive as trading for an MLB catcher at this point is not a good idea.

 

Bingo.

[Sammy Sofa]

[David]

 

Montero will be 33 this year and Schwarber is an emergency catcher.

 

And Willson Contreras?

 

And Lucroy will be 30 this year. Not saying I'd be opposed to acquiring him at the right price (which it probably wouldn't be), but catching isn't really a concern in the short or long term.

 

It's an underrated need in the long term. Having a good year in AA =/= position settled for a while.

 

i'm a lot more willing than many to bite on "one good year" when the peripherals are exactly where they need to be, i guess. by the same token, i'm probably not as willing to buy in on larger sample size if they aren't there.

 

but anyway, i suppose that's all in how you define certain terms. having maybe the best C prospect in baseball is a pretty good spot to be in when looking at the long term of the position, though. as it is, there aren't even that many established productive catchers who you can feel good about years down the road.

[David]

this is what i get for not reading through a thread before i reply. i saw gato's post yesterday and meant to reply when i got back around to it so i did. :-"

[Careless]

That must have been one serious concussion.

They all are.

 

Baseball isn't football. The likelihood of taking a major hit to the head again isn't very good.

Concussions aren't really the big problem for football players. It's all the sub-concussion level hits that add up and horsefeathers their brains. It's why the majority of people with CTE are linemen and linebackers.

 

edit: I'm not really sure what that means for catchers

[David]

http://chicagocubsonline.com/archives/2016/01/report-links-cubs-to-jonathan-lucroy.php

 

Jonathan Lucroy would like to be traded, and the Brewers’ price on the former on the All-Star catcher is reportedly very high. According to Phil Rogers, the Cubs “have been eyeing Lucroy throughout the Hot Stove season, hoping the Brewers would make him available.”

Phil Rogers is not the first to link the Cubs to Jonathan Lucroy this off-season. David Kaplan said the Cubs had interest in Lucroy around the Winter Meetings.

 

Goes along with that report that came like immediately after Heyward signed. Can't remember who it was, though. Might be the Kaplan thing they're mentioning.

[Bryants Disco Ball]

So the Cubs would trade Montero, McKinney, Almora, Vogelbach and others along with $18.5 million for two years of Lucroy? Which would then make Lucroy's team friendly contract no longer team friendly.

 

That seems. ..............like a lot. Unless I read it wrong.

[Ding Dong Johnson]

So the Cubs would trade Montero, McKinney, Almora, Vogelbach and others along with $18.5 million for two years of Lucroy? Which would then make Lucroy's team friendly contract no longer team friendly.

 

That seems. ..............like a lot. Unless I read it wrong.

It seems like a lot because it is.

[Sammy Sofa]

I'd happily trade every single one of them, but that's ridiculous just for Lucroy.

[Cubswin11]

So the Cubs would trade Montero, McKinney, Almora, Vogelbach and others along with $18.5 million for two years of Lucroy? Which would then make Lucroy's team friendly contract no longer team friendly.

 

That seems. ..............like a lot. Unless I read it wrong.

It seems like a lot because it is.

That probably is too much, but if Lucroy is healthy I think I'd do it if we also got Will Smith or Wily Peralta out of the deal with him. Or have the deal expanded with the Rays where we'd get McGee as well as Lucroy.

[Clem Fandango]

If he's the 6-win catcher he was in 2014, I think I'd be okay with it. FG's "Dollars" metric listed his 2014 at $46.7 million.

 

Even his 3.5 win seasons were valued at ~$25 million. For Montero, money, and 3 prospects who are either not locks to be major leaguers or in our future plans?

 

I'd consider it. I just never expected a Lucroy move to include sending Montero and money to the Brewers. I figured that'd need to be a separate deal in and of itself, unless a 3rd team were involved.

 

Edit: Glossed over the "and others". Obviously depending on who the others are would change the tune a bit.

[SouthSideRyan]

So the Cubs would trade Montero, McKinney, Almora, Vogelbach and others along with $18.5 million for two years of Lucroy? Which would then make Lucroy's team friendly contract no longer team friendly.

 

That seems. ..............like a lot. Unless I read it wrong.

 

Youd' basically be paying the same amount of money for Lucroy that we would for Montero.

[Bryants Disco Ball]

So the Cubs would trade Montero, McKinney, Almora, Vogelbach and others along with $18.5 million for two years of Lucroy? Which would then make Lucroy's team friendly contract no longer team friendly.

 

That seems. ..............like a lot. Unless I read it wrong.

 

Youd' basically be paying the same amount of money for Lucroy that we would for Montero.

 

Correct. But part of the reason all these teams are interested is that he's got a great contract for the next two years. That contract isn't quite as team friendly once they pay him Montero money.

 

And then to trade a bunch of other stuff as well just doesn't seem that exciting when catcher isn't exactly a huge weakness and Lucroy may or may not rebound back to his great season of two years ago.

[Little Slide Rooter]

So the Cubs would trade Montero, McKinney, Almora, Vogelbach and others along with $18.5 million for two years of Lucroy? Which would then make Lucroy's team friendly contract no longer team friendly.

 

That seems. ..............like a lot. Unless I read it wrong.

It seems like a lot because it is.

That probably is too much, but if Lucroy is healthy I think I'd do it if we also got Will Smith or Wily Peralta out of the deal with him. Or have the deal expanded with the Rays where we'd get McGee as well as Lucroy.